59 posts categorized "Tax haven"

Monday, January 05, 2015

In case you missed it as the 113th Congress wrapped up its frantic lame duck days, it did manage to keep Internet access for most folks safe from taxation for another fiscal year.

One of the provisions packed into the $1.1 trillion federal spending package passed in mid-December was an extension of the moratorium on local and state taxes for Internet access through October.

A quick note for all y'all logging on in Hawaii, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, Wisconsin and alongside me here in Texas. We'll still see taxes on our Internet providers' bills because the taxes in these seven states were grandfathered by virtue of being in place prior to Oct. 1, 1998.

Everyone else, however, continues to benefit from the extended no tax on Internet access law, formally known as the Internet Tax Freedom Act, or ITFA.

E-sales taxes, too: The ITFA had expired last November. Its renewal was stalled by different approaches in the House and Senate. Matters were further complicated when the ITFA became entangled with the separate issue of state collection of sales taxes on online purchases.

That other tax measure is the Marketplace Fairness Act, which would establish a nationwide system for all online sellers to collect sales taxes. Brick-and-mortar retailers, especially the smaller businesses in the 45 states that charge sales taxes, say that online tax collection is crucial to Main Street shops' survival in the digital age. When e-tailers don't collect sales taxes, real shop owners lose customers to the 'Net.

Although some progress was made last Congressional session on the online sales tax battle, the fight must begin anew with the arrival tomorrow, Jan. 6, of the 114th Congress.

Expect the Capitol Hill online skirmishing over a longer-term and perhaps permanent ITFA, along with the sales tax collection question to take up a lot more legislative debate time.

Digital taxes across the pond: U.S. lawmakers, however, aren't the only ones facing online tax issues. The Internet and related tax concerns know no boundaries.

Under rules first approved in 2008 and expanding this year across the 28-country European bloc, the tax rate on digital services like cloud storage and movie streaming will be determined by where consumers live, and not where the company selling the product has its European headquarters, writes Mark Scott in the New York Times.

This change in the value added tax, or VAT, a tax on goods and services similar to U.S. state sales taxes, is part of a continuing push by to tax the digital economy more heavily. The tax on many purchases of digital content like e-books and smartphone applications now will increase.

Tax experts, according to Scott's article, say the revamped digital purchasing rules could add up to an extra $1 billion a year in tax revenue to European treasuries.

The big remaining question, however, is just who in the EU will pay most of the bill? Will it be passed along to consumers or will retailers and/or manufactures absorb it?

"There inevitably will be a price change," Richard Mollet, chief executive of the British trade group Publishers Association, told Scott. "The question is whether retailers, publishers or customers will have to take on board any increase."

Luxembourg a possible big loser: It also could prompt some international companies that located within European tax haven borders to rethink their jurisdictional choice.

Luxembourg will be one of the countries most affected by the tax change. The tiny country also has low VAT rates, which have lured companies such as Apple's international iTunes business and Microsoft's digital download operation.

But with the new digital tax on the horizon, Luxembourg lawmakers have announced an increase from 15 percent to 17 percent in the country's VAT rate on most goods.

"Luxembourg is going to lose an enormous amount of revenue," said Karen Robb, a tax partner at the accounting firm Grant Thornton in London, told Scott. "There will be fewer compelling tax reasons for companies to stay in Luxembourg."

Sunday, October 26, 2014

Italy's highest court on Oct. 24 overturned two lower court convictions that the duo had participated in what Italian prosecutors called a "sophisticated tax fraud" scheme.

Dolce and Gabbana had been found guilty in April 2013 of using a Luxembourg holding company to avoid paying taxes of €200 million ($253.39 million U.S. as of this morning's exchange rate) on royalties for sales in 2004 and 2005.

That sizable chunk -- I'm going with the more than $253 million U.S. dollars, not the euros amount -- of now-not-due taxes also is this week's By the Numbers figure.

End of long tax battle: The ruling by Rome's Court of Cassation determined that the designers committed no crime. It also cleared the duo's tax accountant, two managers and Dolce's brother.

Following the ruling, which wraps up a seven-year court battle, Gabbana took to Twitter to celebrate, announcing, "Eravamo certi!!! Siamo delle persone oneste!!!" In case your Italian is rusty, that translates, "We knew it!!! We are honest people!"

Tuesday, September 30, 2014

Fashionistas are wrapping up a month of shows that have taken them from New York to London to Milan and now Paris.

One big name designer, however, might not be paying as close attention as usual to the City of Light's catwalks this week. A couple of Prada executives have taxes instead of tailleur on their minds.

A month of global fashion weeks, during which designers preview their coming spring and fall clothing lines, concludes this week in Paris. Click the image for a glimpse of what the rich and famous might be wearing in early 2015.

Prada chairwoman Miuccia Prada Bianchi and her husband and company chief executive officer Patrizio Bertelli are being investigated by Italian authorities over past taxes.

The Italian Judicial Authority informed the couple that it has questions about alleged tax evasion related to the 10 years that Prada was based in the notorious tax-haven country of Luxembourg. Specifically, Italy's tax officials are interested in "the accuracy of certain past tax filings by them as individuals in respect of foreign-owned companies."

The company itself was the target of a tax investigation last year, after which Prada returned its holding company to Italy to appease the tax authorities. The haute couture company and its subsidiaries are not involved in this investigation.

The examination of the Prada executives is the latest look by Italian tax officials at alleged fashion house tax hi-jinks.

Domenico Dolce and Stefano Gabbana, founders of the eponymous Dolce & Gabbana fashion line, were convicted last year of tax evasion. They appealed and in April the two Italian designers were each given a reduced, suspended sentence of 18 months in jail.

Tuesday, August 19, 2014

The biggest complaint about the U.S. tax system is that it gives Uncle Sam too much of our money.

There are lots of contenders for the next biggest tax complaint. One, however, is getting special attention right now.

It's the dissatisfaction with the Internal Revenue Code's worldwide reach.

The ability of Uncle Sam to tax money earned all over the world has come under scrutiny thanks to the recent rash, Walgreens notwithstanding, of corporate tax inversions.

An inversion is an administrative process by which a U.S. company buys a foreign subsidiary and then on paper makes that overseas business the new corporate headquarters of the combined companies. That establishment of the company HQ abroad means the U.S. business then avoids higher U.S. corporate taxes.

Several bills have been introduced in Congress to stop or limit corporate inversions. They were dropped in the hopper mainly for political reasons. No action is likely by a divided House and Senate just a few months away from election day.

The Obama Administration, however, might take action. The president has criticized companies for gaming the tax system with their paper-only headquarter relocations. At Obama's direction, the Treasury Department is looking into steps it can take in this area.

Worldwide vs. territorial taxation: Some folks argue that there wouldn't be a need for such corporate tax tactics or Treasury and Congressional reactions if the United States operated under a territorial tax system instead of a worldwide one.

With worldwide taxation, a corporation headquartered in the United States must pay U.S. corporate income tax on all its income, regardless of whether it is earned within the country or overseas. A U.S.-based multinational corporation can defer its Internal Revenue Service tax bill until it repatriates its foreign earnings by bringing the income back to the country. Or it can avoid most of the IRS liability altogether via a tax inversion.

A territorial, also called source-based or residence-based, tax system taxes only the income earned within a country's borders.

In reality, no country has a strict worldwide or territorial tax system. But most members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) rely on territorial taxes.

Capitol Hill support for territorial: Rep. Dave Camp (R-Mich.) is among those who believe the United States should join the rest of the world when it comes to territorial taxes, particularly for companies.

Camp's territorial tendency is not new. He's been talking about the switch for years. Back in October 2011, the Ways and Means Committee chairman discussed his support for a corporate territorial tax system, noting that the United States is out of step with the rest of the tax world, with Bloomberg TV.

U.S. Rep. Dave Camp, a Michigan Republican and chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, talks about his proposal to shield 95 percent of corporate profits earned offshore from taxation in the U.S. He speaks with Peter Cook on Bloomberg Television's "In the Loop" on Oct. 26, 2011. (Source: Bloomberg)

In addition to the immediate revenue concerns, Camp says the current U.S. corporate tax system hinders domestic investment. "Offshore money doesn't just stay parked," Camp told Bloomberg. "It's invested offshore, too." Camp believes his proposal won't prompt more companies to leave the country, but rather would bring their earnings back to the United States.

Fast forward two years. As part of Camp's comprehensive tax reform discussion draft released in late 2013, the House tax-writing committee chairman revived, in a revised form, his earlier proposal to move the U.S. tax system, at least on the corporate side, to a territorial system. If you want the condensed version, the Ways and Means Committee put out a one-pager, too.

Expatriation instead of inversions: There is no individual tax equivalent to corporate inversions. Even marrying someone from another country doesn't take an American taxpayer off the U.S. income tax hook.

The only way out of U.S. taxes is to expatriate. And a lot of folks are taking this route even though there's an immediate tax cost.

Territorial for all: A change to a territorial tax system might not keep those tax-motivated movers home, but one organization says it definitely would help American taxpayers who live or do business abroad.

Such a tax code change for individuals is the goal of American Citizens Abroad, Inc., or ACA.

The Washington, D.C.-based non-profit volunteer membership organization representing Americans abroad did not testify at the July 22 Senate Finance Committee hearing on the current U.S. system of international taxation. ACA did, however, submit written testimony on the matter.

ACA's basic argument is that U.S. international tax law also needs to consider individual taxpayers. In its written comments, ACA emphasized what it characterizes as the current tax system's devastating effects on U.S. individuals worldwide. The testimony says, in part:

"The United States is the only country in the world, other than Eritrea, to practice citizenship-based taxation. CBT is incompatible with the need for increasing mobility of individuals in the global economy as it discourages Americans to work overseas and severely penalizes those who do live and work overseas. CBT seriously reduces the competitiveness of Americans in the global economy and, in fact, creates conditions of major discrimination and prejudice against Americans abroad. Coupled with FBAR and FATCA reporting requirements, CBT is shutting off Americans abroad from jobs, from insurance policies, from current and investment bank accounts in the country of residence, from partnerships and investments with foreigners, from investments in mutual funds in the country of residence, from access to efficient savings through foreign pension funds, to name but the most obvious negative impacts of CBT on overseas residents."

The "long-arm reach" of the United States' worldwide taxation system also inhibits American entrepreneurs abroad, according to ACA. And, says the group, inherent incompatibilities between the U.S. tax rules and foreign tax systems lead to numerous instances of double taxation despite the application of foreign tax credits.

Any changes to the current U.S. tax code for businesses or individual taxpayers are not likely to happen soon. And shifting totally from a worldwide to a territorial system is major, meaning that if it ever happens it will take much longer.

But any tax change, like the proverbial journey of 1,000 miles, has to start with one step. Territorial taxation advocates hope that long local journey has at least now started.

Wednesday, August 06, 2014

Walgreens, the Deerfield, Illinois-based drugstore chain that's been around for more than a century, is buying the remaining 55 percent of the British pharmacy Alliance Boots.

Walgreens had purchased 45 percent of the European pharmacy/retailer in 2012.

But unlike many other U.S. companies who've been scooping up overseas operations, Walgreens will not make Great Britain it's official headquarters.

The company announced today that Walgreens Boots Alliance, the company that will exist when cash-and-stock deal is finalized sometime next year, will be based in the Chicago area.

No corporate inversion planned: Many business, finance and tax watchers had expected Walgreens to follow its $15.26 billion purchase of the British drugstore with a corporate inversion.

A corporate inversion is a tax domicile maneuver where a United States company buys a foreign subsidiary and then declares that its U.S. facilities are owned by the subsidiary. The result is lower or no taxes to Uncle Sam.

"We took into account all factors, including that we could not arrive at a structure that provided the company and our board with the requisite level of confidence that a transaction of this significance would need to withstand extensive IRS review and scrutiny," said Walgreens CEO Greg Wasson. "As a result, the company concluded it was not in the best long-term interest of our shareholders to attempt to re-domicile outside the U.S."

Bucking the business trend: Congressional Research Service data shows that in the past decade there have been 47 U.S. companies that have done inversions.

The move is totally legal. And for many businesses and their shareholders, a corporate inversion is a wise paper-only bottom line move.

In fact, Walgreens decision not to take advantage of the lower United Kingdom corporate taxes resulted in a stock hit. Shares of the nation's largest drugstore chain dropped to $61.35, down more than 11 percent in mid-morning trading. That was in addition to a stock dive of more than 4 percent Tuesday, Aug. 5, when word leaked that Walgreens would stay headquartered in the U.S.

Americans have no monopoly on patriotic enthusiasm, but the "U.S.A., U.S.A., U.S.A" chant is our de facto motto.

Plus it's an election year. That means politicians have latched onto the corporate inversion issue as they troll for every possible vote.

The president has characterized corporate inversions as "gaming the system." Others have called the move flat-out unpatriotic, although the Internal Revenue Service itself tells taxpayers they should only pay the tax amount legally due.

As long as companies can follow the Internal Revenue Code and re-locate their headquarters via inversions, they are following another cherished U.S. dictate: maximize capitalism's spoils.

Still, there have been legislative efforts to close the corporate domicile loophole. So far they have stalled.

So the Treasury Department is investigating how it could unilaterally block U.S. companies from shifting their headquarters abroad primarily for tax purposes.

Treasury said in a statement issued Aug. 5 that it is "reviewing a broad range of authorities for possible administrative actions that could limit the ability of companies to engage in inversions, as well as approaches that could meaningfully reduce the tax benefits after inversions take place."

Beyond taxes: The change would make inversion opponents happy, but Comedy Central would be sad to lose such a mockable topic.

At least we have the first observations on corporate inversions from the hosts of The Daily Show and The Colbert Report.

Friday, July 25, 2014

On the individual side, the Internal Revenue Service on July 1 got a new tool, the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA), to track down international accounts the tax man says are used to avoid paying Uncle Sam his due.

On the corporate side, the conversation about offshore tax havens went off the charts when the iconic, 114-year-old pharmacy chain Walgreens -- the inventor of the malted milkshake, for heaven's sake! -- announced it was considering moving its headquarters from Deerfield, Illinois, to Switzerland to lower its tax bill.

If Walgreens does relocate its main office abroad, it would have lots of a corporate inversion, also often referred to as tax inversion, company.

Tax inversions are accomplished by a corporation acquiring an overseas operation and then changing the paperwork to show that offshore location as its headquarters.

"From New York to Silicon Valley, more and more large American corporations are reducing their tax bill by buying a foreign company and effectively renouncing their United States citizenship," noted the New York Times' DealB%k column back in October.

Legal but controversial: The trend, which is legal under the current Internal Revenue Code, has become so popular, or at least more reported, that it has generated not only a recent Senate Finance Committee hearing, creatively titled "The U.S. Tax Code: Love It, Leave It or Reform It!," but also the president's ire.

In a speech July 24 at Los Angeles Trade-Technical College, President Obama called for "economic patriotism" among U.S. multinationals. The global companies, the president said should pay their fair share and not resort to tax avoidance maneuvers unavailable to individuals and most American businesses.

Obama reiterated his call for an end to "gaming the system" in an interview with cable business news network CNBC, saying the firms are "basically taking advantage of tax provisions that are technically legal but ... [they] are really not doing right by the country, by the American people."

Pending, political legislation: Two bills have been introduced in Congress to deal with tax inversions as set forth in the president's fiscal year 2015 budget.

Remember, of course, that the newspaper's expatriation/inversion advice should in no way take the place of a more thorough consultation with an international tax expert.

Until that meeting, though, have fun!

Domestic tax moves, too: Relocation within the United States also often has a tax component. But as I discussed last this week at my other tax blog, wealthy New York City residents don't seem too worried about taxes when they load up the moving vans.

I usually post my additional tax thoughts over at Bankrate every Tuesday and Thursday.If you miss them there, check here at the ol' blog the following weekend -- or sometimes a day earlier -- for the posts' highlights and links.

That's right. The good old U. S. of A. is considered a fine tax haven for Oz residents looking to pay a little less to the their tax man. It comes in at number six in M2 Australia's list of "Our 10 Top Favourite Tax Havens." (And yes, I listed the story's title because I love the extra vowel in favorite.)

In putting together its list, the men's lifestyle magazine says "any place that modifies its tax laws to lure in foreign capital could be considered a tax haven."

As for why the United States made the list, the magazine notes that while the U.S. loses "a ton" of tax revenue every year, it also "earn[s] some of it back from everyone else." Specifically, according to M2:

"The United States is the world's largest economy and its main financial centre in Wall Street is, on some measures, the world's biggest. In general, the United States has played a pioneering role in devising ways to defend itself against foreign tax havens, but has failed to address its own role in attracting illicit financial flows and supporting tax evasion."

Which other countries join America on Australia's tax haven top 10? Here's Australia's full list of tax havens:

That fiery possibility is probably why we don't object to paying the Lone Star State's tax on fireworks.

Limited sales, added tax: Texas fireworks retailers have been collecting a 2 percent fireworks tax in addition to the state and local sales taxes since 2001.

Specifically, the tax applies to "small fireworks in the U.S. Department of Transportation's 1.4G category that may legally be sold to the general public each year in Texas."

To avid Fourth of July patriotic partiers, that means you pay more for popular products such as firecrackers, bottle rockets, Roman candles and fountains.

It's not a huge amount of money, mainly because fireworks aren't sold year-round in the Lone Star State.

Texas allows us residents to buy fireworks just three times a year: to celebrate Cinco de Mayo (May 1 to May 5 in certain areas of the state), the New Year (Dec. 20 through Jan. 1) and U.S. Independence Day (June 24 through July 4).

The bulk of the seasonally-collected tax money comes in during the July 4 buying period.

I'm a bit surprised that Texas Independence Day didn't make the fireworks sales cut. I'd be curious to see how much more tax money might be collected if the March 2 date was added to the approved pyrotechnics calendar.

Fireworks' fees fighting fires: Just as it controls when fireworks can be sold to individuals, the state also directs how the fireworks tax is spent.

I know just how he feels! Great show, but can you turn down the volume a bit?

Tax departments in Indiana and Michigan also collect fireworks taxes. At least a portion of the special tax collected in those states also goes to fire-specific programs

The price of pyrotechnics: It's also not unusual that Texas, Indiana and Michigan collect fireworks taxes.

H&R Block researchers found that Southerners and Midwesterners spend $35 per person on fireworks each Fourth of July. That, says the franchise tax preparation giant, is double the average expenditure for folks in the Northeast and West.

And we all know that tax departments love to go where the collecting is easy.

Regardless of where you live and what added charges you pay for your fireworks, please display them safely. Uncle Sam hates it when his birthday party is upstaged by a phalanx of firetrucks or interrupted by a trip to the emergency room.

Tax-free flags: While three states collect special taxes on fireworks, as I noted last this week at my other tax blog, another July 4 staple is tax-free in many more jurisdictions.

First came the news that the Internal Revenue Service has officially adopted a Taxpayer Bill of Rights. This has been a long-time goal of National Taxpayer Advocate Nina Olson, who joined IRS Commissioner John Koskinen to announce the move.

Both also used the opportunity to send a message to Congress. The IRS can do a better job of providing customer, i.e., taxpayer, service if the agency is properly funded.

Tax haven restrictions: Uncle Sam's money also was the topic of my second post last week at Bankrate Taxes Blog. This time, though, Capitol Hill lawmakers were looking at how contracts are awarded.

Specifically, for the upcoming fiscal year former U.S. businesses that now are incorporated or chartered in Bermuda or the Cayman Islands, two popular corporate tax havens, would not be eligible for federal contracts.

I usually post my additional tax thoughts at Bankrate.com on Tuesday and Thursday. You can always check here at the ol' blog the following weekend for a synopsis and links if you miss the original items.

Sunday, June 08, 2014

The ability of some major U.S. corporations to avoid domestic taxes by setting up subsidiaries in offshore tax haven countries has gotten a lot of attention of late.

But not every company can pull that off.

A recent New York Times analysis found that for every Apple, with its 14 percent tax rate on $135 billion in earnings (that comes to a tax bill of just less than $19 billion), there's a KeyCorp, with its 150 percent effective tax rate on $1.33 billion in earnings, resulting in $1.99 billion taxes paid.

The newspaper put the corporate tax data into a nifty interactive tool. The bubbles in the image below give you an idea of the range of corporate taxes paid in the United States.

Click on the image to go to the Times' website where you can take advantage of the various comparison options, such rolling over the bubbles for pop-up information or searching for a specific company or industry.

When the newspaper's researchers combined earnings and taxes for all S&P 500 companies, they found that the overall effective corporate tax rate was 29.1 percent. That's this week's By the Numbers figure.

Not all escape taxes: But, to paraphrase the popular saying, each company's tax mileage varies.

The differences are particularly notable in the hefty Internal Revenue Service bills paid by three big energy firms.

Daily Tax Tip

Roth vs. traditional IRA -- Both Roth and traditional IRAs offer some type of tax savings. And you have until April 15 to open and/or contribute to one of them for the prior tax year. But which type of IRA to choose? Roth IRAs offer a good way to put away money tax-free for retirement. Traditional IRAs could provide some folks with an immediate tax deduction. These additional details, comparisons and IRA picking tips can help you decide. (March 31, 2015)

Did you miss a daily tip posted above? No worries. They're collected in the 2015 Daily Tax Tips pages, one for each month of the filing season: January, February, March and, coming soon, April. And stay tuned for Weekly Tax Tips, coming after we survive the April 15 filing deadline!

Sponsored Links

Counting Down to Tax Day

Tax filing day 2015 will be here before you know it, but our countdown clock to the 11:59 p.m. April 15 deadline will help make sure you don't miss it.

Time for Tax Tasks

March 1: It's March, the last full month of tax-filing season. Are you attacking your tax return like a lion? Or have the Internal Revenue Code's complexities turned you into a tax lamb?

Either way, you're at the right place. The following tax tips are for filers regardless of March animal avatars.

If so and you received $20 in tips in February, use Form 4070 to report them today to your employer. And don't forget to include the value of atypical tips.

March 16: Business filers generally beware the Ides of March because the 15th day of this month also is the corporate tax filing deadline, which can be dangerous to a company's bottom line. This year, however, the deadline day was on a Sunday, meaning that business taxpayers must file and pay any due tax by today.

March 17: It's St. Patrick's Day! But don't trust lucky charms to get you through a tax audit. Be prepared by, among other things, making sure you have sufficient documentation for all your tax claims and hiring a tax pro with audit defense experience to guide you through the process.

March 20: Spring has sprung! Not only is it time to finally welcome warmer weather, any spring cleaning also could pay off on your 2015 tax return. Get rid of all your unnecessary household items and clothes that no longer fit by donating them to your favorite nonprofit. You can claim the value as an itemized charitable deduction.

March 25: If you celebrated your 70½ birthday last year (and who doesn't have parties for half birthdays?) and didn't take money out of your tax-deferred retirement accounts by the end of 2014, you must make a specified withdrawal by April 1. No joke. These required minimum distributions, or RMDs, are Uncle Sam's way of finally getting his piece of your traditional IRA, workplace 401(k) or self-employed retirement plan pie.

March 31: You've put the finishing touches on your 1040 and are finally ready to file. Wait! Take one quick review of your forms to ensure you haven't overlooked any tax breaks or made any common tax mistakes. All's good? Then drop your return in the snail mail box or hit enter to e-file.

Advertisements

0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ...

Taxes are all about the numbers. Check out these (mostly) weekly By the Numbers figures.

What are you looking for?

Looking for something in particular? Start with the Table of Contents. Or check out the Archives, where you can review posts by month and category. Or enter specific keywords in the box below to search Don't Mess With Taxes.

Keep Uncle Sam cranky!

It's no wonder Uncle Sam is not very happy here. His vault is empty. Don't Mess With Taxes aims to keep him cranky by providing tax and personal finance tips and advice that will put more money in your bank account, not the government treasury.

I gotta tell ya ...

AKA Disclaimer:

I am a professional journalist who has been covering tax issues since 1999. I am not a professional tax preparer. The content on Don't Mess With Taxes is my personal opinion based on my study and understanding of tax laws, policies and regulations. It’s provided for your private, noncommercial, educational and informational purposes only. It’s not a recommendation of any specific tax action(s) you should take. Similarly, mentions of products or services are not endorsements. In other words, my ramblings on the ol' blog are free advice and you know what they say about getting what you pay for. That's why when it comes to filing your taxes, I urge you to get additional, professional, paid-for guidance from an accountant, Enrolled Agent or other qualified tax professional who is familiar with your individual tax circumstances.

Note 1: Some of the links on this site are affiliate links. That means that if you click through from a Don't Mess With Taxes link and then buy the product, I receive a commission.

Note 2: Links to outside content might become inactive due to changes at the content's originating Web page. If you discover dead links, please e-mail me the details. Thanks.

DMWT Mobile

Don't Mess With Taxesis now optimized for readers on the go. You don't even need an app. Just type dontmesswithtaxes.typepad.com into your smartphone or other mobile device and it will load in a formatfor smaller browsers.